Rev. Epwarp Hincks on the Defacement of Egyptian Monuments. 111 
The third occasion of defacement was the overthrow of the sun worshippers. 
and restoration of the worship of Ammon, under Horus. At this time all the mo- 
numents of Skhai and his son were defaced, the tomb of the former being shame- 
fully violated. The defacements of Gebel Tounh and El Tell took place . 
now, as well as the overthrow of those monuments at Karnac, the blocks of 
which were used by Horus and Menephthah I., in the construction of their 
several edifices. 
Two monuments in European collections appear to have suffered during this 
defacement. One is a stele in the Athanasi collection, dated in the first of Chceac 
in the fourth year of the reign of a king, both whose cartouches are defaced, but 
whose banner is preserved; and from the resemblance which it bears to the 
banner of Skhai, as it is exhibited in his tomb, there can be little doubt that the 
king spoken of is Amenothph IV. At this time he had not commenced his hos- 
tility to Ammon, whose name appears on this stele. At Gebel Tounh we have a 
date thirty-two months later, viz. on the thirteenth of Mesore of his sixth year. He 
had then assumed a new banner, along with his new phonetic name of Vachenaten. 
The sculptures at El Tell are probably three or four years later, as he appears 
there with four children, while he has only two at Gebel Tounh. This remark 
is due to M. Hote. The other defacement which I attribute to this occasion is 
that on a lion in the British Museum, presented by Lord Prudhoe. One of the 
two lions was executed in the reign of Amenothph III.; the other, which bears 
the obliterated cartouches, is evidently of later date, and must have been the 
work either of Skhai or of his son. I say this is evident, because the inscription 
on the lion is to this effect : ‘‘ The king with the defaced cartouches has renovated 
the monument of his father, Amenothph III.” Dr. Leemans supposes that the 
defaced cartouches are those of Horus, and that the erasure was made by an 
Ethiopian monarch, with a view to insert his own name in their room. It is, 
however, unlikely that such an intention should be entertained; and it is 
still more unlikely that, if the names of the Egyptian king were erased with that 
intention, the Ethiopian king should not have completed his work. There does 
not appear any objection to the theory that the obliterated cartouches are those 
of Amenothph IV., he having executed the work before he changed his religious 
principles, and, consequently, while he still retained that name. 
The fourth occasion of defacement in Egyptian monuments was the hostility 
